“Gongyang’s Commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals” is one of the Confucian Classics. The periods it covered is identica to that in the Annals itself. It has been said that its author is Gongyang Gao (公羊高), a scholar of the State of Qi in the Warring Stats period, who was a student of Zixia, a disciple of Confucius. The content of the commentary was in a verbal form until it reached Gao’s great grandson Shou (寿), who, in collaboration with Hu Wusheng (胡毋生)， carved the text onto bamboo slips.
A sample of the printed copy of the Commentary
As you know there are three commentaries available. They are Zuo’s Commentary, Gongyang Commentary and Guliang Commentary. Zuo’s commentary was in seal’s script and has been regarded as an ancient version. The commentaries by both Gongyang and Guliang were in clerical script and have been regarded as modern versions.
As you perhaps know the focus of Zuo’s commentary was to record historical facts, the focus of Gongyang’s commentary was to elaborate on the meaning of the profound truth contained in the annals.
A. Prominent Thoughts in Gongyang’s Commentary
1. Respecting the Imperial House and maintaining the great unity of the country. Just as what Gongyang’s Commentary says about the meaning of “the Emporor’s January” at the beginning of part of Duke Yin, “What is ‘the primary year’? It is the first year when the Emperor ascended the throne. What does ‘spring’ mean? It is the beginning season of the year. Who is the emperor? It is King Wen of Zhou. Why does ‘emperor’ come before ‘January’? Because the January was determined by King Wen of Zhou. Why do you say it is the Emperor’s January? This is to stress the great unity and everywhere in the country must act on the Emperor’s orders.” So, the “great unity” is the core of this commentary and the political platform of the Confucian school. “The Biography of Dong Zhongshu in the History of Han” (汉书·董仲舒传) interpreted “the great unity” as: the thought on the great unity in the annals is a constant canon between the heaven and the earth and a universal feeling in the ancient times and today as well. In order to maintain the great unity, anything that might blur the dignity of the imperial house, the annals tried to hide the fact and only used subtle words to express the author’s attitude. Gongyang’s commentary gives explicit explanation whenever such subtle words appear. For instance, in the 28th year of the reign of Duke Xi of Lu (鲁僖公), the duke called on the Emperor at the latter’s residence, the duke didn’t go to the capital to see the Emperor, who, at the request of the Duke of Jin, had come to Jiantu for a meeting. Gongyang’s Commentary explained thus: the duke called on the Emperor at the latter’s residence. Why didn’t the duke go to the capital? Because the Emperor was at Jiantu. Why didn’t the annals say the Emperor was at Jiantu? Because the annals didn’t regard it necessary for the Emperor to be at this meeting of dukes. There are many such examples in Gongyang’s Commentary.
Kang Youwei’s Book on the World of Great Harmony, in which the theory of “three generations” was advocated
2. The theory of “three generations” （三世说）
The specific wording of the theory of “three generations” are like this: the terms of describing what Confucius saw, heard and informed indirectly are different. Gongyang’s commentary discussed this at three places. It was Dong Zhongshu, who divided the 12 dukes of Lu in the Spring and Autumn period into three generations: they are “the generation of seeing”, “the generation of hearing” and the “generation of indirect information.” According to the theory of Gongyang, the “generation of indirect information” is the remotest and they also termed it as a “generation of upheavals, at that time outside the state of Lu, it was other parts of Xia”; then the society developed into the “generation of hearing”, which they thought was a time of progress when the Duke of Qi was trying to maintaining the unity of the country and guarding against bordering tribes; then the society developed to the “generation of seeing”, when bordering tribes were subdued and peace prevailed. Scholars have tagged this theory as the core of historical philosophy of the Gongyang School, which reflected a simple theory of evolution of ancient Chinese. But, just as what Gu Jiegang (顾颉刚), a modern scholar pointed out that this theory is hardly convincing, the more the Spring and Autumn period advanced, the more chaotic it was. At the same time, this theory was used by Kang Youwei (康有为) to push forward his reform programs. At the end of the 19th century, Kang blended the theory of “three generations” with concepts of “well-to-do” family and the society of “Great Harmony” as the basis of his reform, which lasted for only 100 days and failed.
A modern book on “The Entity of Three”.
3. Connecting the new with the old, which means when a new political power was established, it should absorb what was good in the previous regime, and the way to do it was to confer dukedom to the son of two previous rulers; thus the two newly conferred dukes and the present ruler form an entity of three. This is the famous system of “the entity of three.” In Chinese it is called “通三统”. Such an arrangement made things easier to change, and its primary purpose was to facilitate change. “On General” in the “Book of Huainanzi” says that “Reform maybe carried out timely when people understand why the rule by law is necessary...if old way of rites and law are still practiced, there would be chaos in the society...”
4. Rendering the subtle words explicit. Scholars held that in the annals, there are profound truth, and subtle words as well. The purpose of elaborating on the profound truth was to warn later generations by castigating on traitors and treacherous persons; yet, where subtle words are used are places about changing the law for purpose of peace. To bring out the meaning of such delicate phrases is the mission of Gongyang’s Commentary. For instance, in the original of the annals, it says in the part of Duke Min of Lu, “Summer, May, people in their sacrificial outfits at the Temple of Duke Zhuang.” If you don’t know the background it is hard to comprehend what it talks about. Gongyang’s Commentary explains thus: the people of Lu went to the temple of Duke Zhuang in their sacrificial outfits for a sacrificial ceremony. Confucius was saying it was wrong to put on sacrificial outfits. Because Duke Zhuang had not been died for three full years. A sacrificial ceremony could only be held when the dead had passed away for three whole years. The words Confucius used was “at Duke Zhuang’s”, that means the temple was not yet a palace temple. Then, why was it written in the annals? Confucius wanted to condemn Duke Min for not abiding the rules of three full years. Another example is in the 8th year of the reign of Duke Xi of Lu, the original says: Autumn, July, at the Imperial Ancestral Temple, the term “Madam” was used respects were expressed to her. Gongyang’s Commentary explains: “used” means should not be used and “respects” should not be paid. It was wrong to place the memorial tablet of the wife of Duke Zhuang of Lu in the Imperial Ancestor’s Temple. Why didn’t Confucius address her as Mrs. Jiang? This was to belittle her. Why? To castigate Duke Xi for taken a concubine as his wife. Why did he do so? Because the State of Qi pressured him to make a girl, who was a servant as part of the dowry, his formal wife.
A modern book about “King among Common Place People.”
5. A “King among common place people” (素王说). Gangyang scholars regarded Confucius as a “King among common place people”. Jia Gongyan (贾公彦) of Tang Dynasty once said, “Confucius formulated law for the King of common place people to be applied by later generations.” Gangyang scholars interpreted the character “素” as: emptiness, to mean that Confucius had no titles, yet he was on a position of nobility.” Such a way of addressing Confucius can be found in many classical works, but it all started from Gongyang’s Commentary.
B. Studies of Gongyang’s Commentary
Gongyang’s Commentary has been the most disputable classic in China. Western Han saw its flourishing days. The fall of the Qin Empire proved the drawbacks of Legalism, there were some uneasiness in the early Western Han period. In such a circumstance Emperor Wu of Han adopted Dong Zhongshu’s (董仲舒) proposal of “respecting Confucian thoughts only”. At that time, Confucian classics, which were being used, were all in modern script. The ideas of “the great unity”, “divine right of the emperor”, “three generations” became authoritative theories and legal benchmarks. Gongyang’s Commentary had been repeatedly quoted and consulted in the process of decision making. Gongyang’s Commentary prevailed in academic affairs. In the 4th year during the reign of Emperor Ling, Cai Yong (蔡邕) wrote down Gongyang’s Commentary in clerical script and had the calligraphy carved on stone tablets and erected them before the Imperial Ancestor Temple. This version turned out to be China’s first Confucian text that was approved by the government. Emperors of Han appointed masters to each of the Five Confucian Classics, for the Spring and Autumn Annals, Emperor Jing of Han appointed Hu Wusheng and Dong Zhongshu as masters to disseminate the classic. Scholars like Yan Pengzu (严彭祖)，Yan Anle (颜安乐) and Dai Hong (戴宏) were also quite influential at the time.
In the Han Dynasty, Dong Zhongshu and He Xiu (何休) were most important Gongyang scholars.
A portrait of Dong Zhongshu
Dong Zhongshu: (179 B.C.-104 B.C.) He was born in today’s Jingxian County of Hebei Province. He has been regarded as a great philosopher, thinker and a master of Confucian studies. “The Treasure in the Spring and Autumn Annals” (春秋繁露) is his representative work. It is in 17 volumes and 82 chapters. The book focused on exploring the primary intention of the sayings of Confucius. That’s why Wang Chong (王充) of Eastern Han made such a remark: “You can find in Confucius the thoughts of King Wen and in Zhongshu the thoughts of Confucius.” Dong is the one who established a holistic system of the studies of Gongyang’s Commentary.
A portrain of He Xiu.
He Xiu: (129-182) He was born in today’s Yanzhou of Shandong. He was one of the fourth generations of student of Dong Zhongshu. He stammered in his speech. After a failure of a political involvement, he shut himself up for over ten years to complete “Decoding the Exegetics of the Gongyang Commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals” (春秋公羊解诂). He also wrote “Comments on Cases at the Han Court” (春秋汉议)，in which he commented on 600 cases dealt with by the imperial court of Han. On behalf of the modern version of classics, he was engaged in arguments with Zheng Xuan (郑玄), a representative of the ancient version. Even thought he lost the fight, he was successful in the sense that his influence in history was stronger; together with Dong Zhongshu, they inherited Confucius and Mencius, they enlightened Cheng Hao and Cheng Yi and Zhu Xi, and his importance can still be felt today in modern thinking and politics.
In the periods of Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties the society was in continuous chaos, the thoughts of Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi prevailed.
During Tang and Song Dynasties, scholars like Kong Yingda (孔颖达)，the grandson of Confucius in the 31st generation, and Xu Yan (徐彦) did some thing to promote Gongyang’s commentary.
At the end of Yuan and the beginning of Ming, zhao Fang (赵汸) was conspicuous in his studies of Gongyang’s Commentary, but he failed to grasp the core values of the classic and his influence was very limited Fortunately there was a revival of the studies in the Qing Dynasty. The first one who broke silence was Zhuang Cunyu (庄存与，1719-1788), who wrote “The Essence of the Spring and Autumn Annals”, “Cases of Studies of the Spring and Autumn Annals” (春秋要旨、春秋举例). The next important scholar was Kong Guangsen (孔广森,1752-1786), who was also a posterity of Confucius, who wrote “The General Meaning of Gongyang’s Commentary” (公羊通义), which tried to deny the school of ancient version and defend the school of modern version. Liu Fenglu (刘逢禄，1776-1829) was a prolific writer, his most representative work is “Explanation of He Xiu’s Exegetic Writing” (春秋公羊何氏释例)，which refuted all kinds of criticism on Gongyang’s Commentary. Liu’s peer Ling Shu (凌曙，1775-2829) wrote “A Proprietary Annotation of Gongyang” (公羊礼疏), which tried to answer questions put to He Xiu in history.A portrait of Gong Zizhen
At late Qing, Gong Zizhen (龚自珍，1792-1841) turned Gongyang’s Commentary into a philosophical weapon for social transformation, he stressed the necessity of political reform and pointed out, “from the ancient times to now, all laws have been changed.” Wei Yuan (魏源, 1793-1858) was a social activist. He wrote “Collection of Essays on the Conduction of Royal Court Affairs” (皇朝经世文编)，which combined ways of salvation of the society with academic thinking, and had been very influential. We mentioned about Kang Youwei (1858-1927) in the foregoing. He was a prominent leader of reform, but before the reform was executed, he had written a great amount of books and articles to promote reform. His works include: “Survey of Faked Classics in the New Studies” (新学伪经考) and “Survey of Changes of System by Confucius” (孔子改制考) and etc. He injected bourgeois thinking of reform and social evolution into the theories in Gongyang’s Commentary, which was a creative development of the studies of Gongyang and one of the great results of the history of modern Chinese philosophy.
Other reform activists like Liang Qichao (梁启超), Tan Sitong （谭嗣同）, Xia Zengyou （夏曾佑）, Tang Caichang （唐才常）and Huang Zunxian （黄遵宪）were all firm believers in the Gongyang’s Commentary.
In the 20s of the last century, Professor Chen Zhu (陈柱) published “The Philosophy of Gongyang” (公羊家哲学)，in which he elaborated the thoughts of Gongyang in 14 aspects, and propounded modern significance of old studies. Xiong Shili (熊十力), a modern Neo-Confucian master gave new interpretations to Gongyang thoughts, in his “Key Points in Reading Classics” (读经示要), he devoted over 100 pages in explaining the significance of the idea of “three generations” in Gongyang’s Commentary by analyzing it with modern evolution concept.An Introduction to the Studies of Gongyang
The most prominent contemporary scholar of Gongyang’s Commentary is Jiang Qing (蒋庆)，who wrote “An Introduction of the Studies of Gongyang--Confucian Political Wisdom and Historic Belief” (公羊学引论--儒家的政治智慧与历史信仰), published in August 2014 by Fujian Education Publishing House. The book gave a detailed and penetrating account of the nature and basic thoughts contained in Gongyang’s Commentary. Jiang Qing is a representative of modern Neo-Confucian School, born in 1953 in Guiyang, his family origin was in Xuzhou of Jiangsu, his published books include “Political Confucianism”, “The Time Value of Confucianism”, he also published a book in English, which is entitled: “A Confucian Constitutional Order──How China’s Ancient Past Can Shape Its Political Future” published by Princeton University Press in 2012.
There have been serious studies of Gongyang’s Commentary in today’s academic field. For instance “The History of the Studies of Gongyang’s Commentary” (公羊学发展史) by Huang Kaiguo (黄开国), ”Different Connotations in the Studies of Gongyang’s Commentary in Various Historical Periods”(历代公羊学异义) by Huang Kaiguo; “Analysis of China’s Reform in the Viewpoints of Gongyang’s Commentary” (中国改革的公羊学分析) by Zeng Yi (曾亦)；”Subtlety in Dong Zhongshu’s Study of Gongyang’s Commentary” (董仲舒的春秋公羊学研究探微) by Ping Fei (平飞)；“Studies of Gongyang’s Commentary by Kong Guangsen” (孔广森的公羊学) by Lu Zhenyue (陆振岳)；“A Thorough Review of the Studies of Gongyang’ Commentary in the Qing Dynasty”(清代春秋公羊学通论) by Chen Qitai (陈其泰)；“Comments on Gong Zizhen’s Study of Gongyang’s Commentary” (龚自珍公羊学研究述评) by Liu Chaoge (刘朝阁).
